Reading on Time magazine how some people are scared for the city of Houston as Ike nears the Texas coast, and all I can think about are those Texans whom I know and those who I don't from this site. I'm not exactly certain how much hurricane preparedness is ingrained into the fabric of Texas Gulf Coast life, but if it's anything like South Florida, you should all be aware about the storm shutters and the masking tape and the water and the batteries and all the rest of the things you need to do to prepare for a storm and its aftermath. And I certainly hope that any and all of my friends here affected are going to take these steps, no matter what last minute changes in direction Ike might take. Wilma in 2005 didn't do all that much damage to my area, but it still knocked out power for three weeks, and though the National Guard stepped in with ice and water, you;'d better believe I was glad I made the preparations. And of course I still remember Andrew in the early '90's, when South Florida after being spared for nearly 30 years, was caught somewhat complacent as the Cat 5 storm came ashore. Anyway, just wanted to say to those Astrofans here who even MIGHT be affected: please make the preparations necessary for this storm, and please stay safe.

Maybe we're going to have an offense worth writing home about this year after all.  Lifted up on the bootstraps of Miguel Tejada, the Astros had another huge offensive performance in Cincy last night, featuring a 7-run fourth inning, and have now scored 30 runs in their past 3 games.

This is the 40th time in franchise history that the team has scored 30 runs over three consecutive games, and it's the first time the team has managed it since August 29th of 2006, when another 7-run inning, this one in the 8th vs. the Brewers put the capper on a three game runscoring spree that had started in Pittsburgh Last year's team once scored at least nine runs in four straight games, but because in the one game they didn't score 9, they scored 10, never scored more than 28 in any 3game period during the 4-game streak.

The 2008 Astros become the first team in franchise history to manage such a three-game streak in the month of April.  Previously the earliest any Houston team had managed the feat was in 1974, when the Lee May-led 'Stros scored 33 runs in a three game period that ended on May 1st.  That particular streak featured an 18 - 2 pasting of the Cubs in which May went 5 for 5 with 2 homers.

3-Game, 30-Run Stretches by Month

April	1
May	8
June	3
July	14
August	8
September	6
Total	40

Of the 40 times the feat has been accomplished, 36 of them have come since Jeff Bagwell was a rookie in 1991, and 17 have come since the team left the Astrodome after the 1999 season.  It was the 2000 team that accomplished the feat most, doing it 9 times, despite not notching their first streak until July 24th.    During the month of September when the team was long out of contention, Richard Hidalgo had perhaps the best month in team history, and the team, ignited by Reeshard, had five individual streaks where they averaged ten runs a game for the month.

Only two other teams have had seasons in which they managed as many as five such streaks:  the 1994 team--led by the other great month in team history, Jeff Bagwell's July--had six, and the 1999 team had five.

And again, none of these teams got rolling until the hot summer rolled around.  Perhaps even greater things are in store for this team, having managed such a thing in April.

First check might be today, when the team sees if they can become the first team since the 2004 team to average ten runs a game over 4 straight games.

     

 

 

During last night's game, the Marlins' announcer Rich Waltz told a story about Brandon Backe that I'd never heard before, that in a high school playoff game vs. Spring, Backe threw 213 pitches.

Waltz then cracked that that was probably why Backe entered pro ball as an infielder, and then his partner Tommy Hutton laughed  that it was probably why Backe had Tommy John surgery.   . . . he was joking, but he was also probably right.

Had anyone ever heard this story before?  I never knew that Backe was a pitcher in high school, or that his school in Galveston had been so successful. 

And this almost goes without saying, but I think that any high school coach who has his star pitcher throw 200 pitches should be taken out back and shot . . . .

When I woke up this morning, ESPN told me that the Astros were down to their last strike before rallying for the win off Hoffmann and (of course) this made me wonder when the last time it was that we came back after being down to our last strike.

The answer is a pleasant one:  June 28, 2007 when there were two outs and no-one on in the 11th for Biggio when he hit a two-strike infield single.  Pence would double and Berkman would be HBP before Lee hit the walkoff slam off Fuentes.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playbyplay?gameId=270628118&full=1&inning=0

 

The next night the Astros would be down to their last out (but not their last strike) before Loretta hit the walkoff off Fuentes.  Hopefully this bodes well for today's game in San Diego, the walkoffs in bunches thing . . . .

%%BOX,test_prefs%%

AKA In Polite Society: Big Puma, Fat Elvis Around Here: Felvis, Lancicle

Statistics Year AB R H 2B HR RBI AVG OBP SLG OPS Seasonal EQA 1999 93 10 22 2 4 15 .237 .321 .387 .708 .251 2000 353 76 105 28 21 67 .297 .388 .561 .949 .302 2001 577 110 191 55 34 126 .331 .430 .620 1.051 .331 2002 578 106 169 35 42 128 .292 .405 .578 .982 .320 2003 538 110 155 35 25 93 .288 .408 .515 .923 .311 2004 544 104 172 40 30 106 .316 .450 .566 1.016 .335 2005 468 76 137 34 24 82 .293 .411 .524 .934 .316   Images About the Site

Links Page at Baseball-Reference DT Page at Baseball Prospectus Page at Astrosdaily with selection of Media Files Page at Astroland featuring a baseball card that shows Lance dressed up as a "Sumo Wrestler" Classic Dan Patrick interview with Lance; perhaps first reference to "Fat Elvis"

Game Hero Awards August 4, 2006 July 26, 2006 July 6, 2006 July 3, 2006 June 17, 2006 June 8, 2006 May 3, 2006 April 16, 2006 April 5, 2006   September 21, 2005 September 5, 2005 August 22, 2005 July 29, 2005 July 8, 2005 June 21, 2005 June 20, 2005 June 9, 2005 May 31, 2005

Thank you Craig Biggio

This is this site's mission. To be as cool as possible. That is all.

This is the FAQ for this fine Scoop site. It's brand new, so there haven't been any questions asked frequently yet. But if there were, you bet they'd be right here!

You have exceeded this site's maximum posting rate. You are only allowed to post a certain number of comments or stories in a short period of time. Your user account is now locked from posting for a few minutes, after which it will become normal again. Be warned though: if you attempt to post again while you're locked out, the timeout period will double, and this will keep happening as long as you keep trying to post. Walk away for a few minutes, have a nice cup of coffee, come back, and everything will be cool. Thanks.

Below is a preview of what the selected feed will look like once it's been added. The headlines within it are the current ones.

%%BOX,rdf_feeds%%

%%BOX,ad_types%%

%%BOX,ad_pay_type_select%%

%%BOX,paypal_confirm%%

If you don't know HTML, that won't stop you from making your stories and posts as nicely formatted and fancy as posts by those who do. If you set your "Post Mode" in Comment Preferences to "Auto Format", Scoop will do its best to format your comment based on its contents, instead of forcing you to litter it with tags. The following page will describe the mechanics used by Scoop to format comments and stories posted in "Auto Format" mode.

Paragraphs and line breaks

In order to start a new paragraph, simply press Enter twice. To insert a line break, press Enter once. Note that text will automatically wrap to fit the size of the screen, so line breaks like that are generally unnecessary. In most cases, you shouldn't need to hit Enter at all except for paragraph breaks.

Bold and Italics

If you want to emphasize a word or phrase, you can type it into the text box surrounded in asterisks (*), *like this*. This will cause the text between the asterisks to be rendered in bold type. Similarly, you can also enter text between underscores (_) or slashes (/), _like this_ /or this/, in order to render the given text in italics.

Making links

Of course, you can't post on the Web without needing to insert a link every now and then. Creating a link is as simple as typing in the URL (the address shown in your browser's toolbar at the top of the window). Auto Format mode will automatically turn all URLs into links. For example, if you were to type the following text:

This website runs weblog software from http://scoop.kuro5hin.org.

the resulting comment will look like this:

This website runs weblog software from http://scoop.kuro5hin.org.

Of course, it's not always desirable to have the text of the link be the same as the target of the link. You can use brackets ('[' and ']') in order to specify both the link text and link target. For example, if you wanted the text "This search engine" to point to http://www.google.com/, you would type the following:

[This search engine http://www.google.com/]

Which will render like so:

This search engine

Making lists

You can create bulleted lists by entering a series of lines starting with an asterisk followed by a space ('* '). Numbered lists can be created similarly, by typing a series of lines beginning with a number follwed by a period ('1. '). For example, typing in the following text:

I had these items for breakfast this morning:
* Eggs
* Bacon
* Toast
* Hot grits

will give the following result:

I had these items for breakfast this morning:

• Eggs
• Bacon
• Toast
• Hot grits

This site uses a system called "Mojo" to try to keep the comments as high-signal as possible. All users can rate all comments, except their own, between 1 and 5. When your comments are rated by others, those ratings are combined into a weighted average (newer comments count more than older ones) called your "Mojo". This, roughly, represents the rating we could expect your next comment to receive based on your past comments.

Users who have a mojo greater than a certain minimum, and who have posted a sufficient number of comments, such as yourself, for example, are considered "trusted" users, and have the added capability to rate comments below the normal minimum rating, and also to see comments rated below the minimum (they are hidden from normal users).

This is a great responsibility for you. It means you've earned the right to peer-review content from untrusted users, and determine if it is spam. We rely on you to rate as much as you can, and to keep the comments as high-signal as we've all come to expect.

Please use your "zero" rating with care! It is *only* for use on comments that are wholly content-free. If you think the poster is clueless, or an idiot, or you just don't agree with them, that is *not* grounds for a zero rating. Zero is for comments that are offensive, script-generated, or otherwise content-free and intended solely to annoy and/or abuse other readers.

Please do not rate duplicate comments 0! As virtually all duplicate comments are accidental, this unfairly impacts the poster's mojo. A "1" rating and an email to %%local_email%% notifying us of the duplicate (please include direct link to the comment) is the appropriate response.

You also have a duty to read comments posted by untrusted users (you are the only ones who can!) and rate them up if they deserve to be viewable. We hate to see users become untrusted, and want them to rejoin the community, and rating them up when they post good comments is the only way for that to happen.

It is a cruel irony that those who are trusted, in any context, usually have more work with no particular reward for that work, and that is the case here as well. You still post with no initial rating, like a normal user, and your ratings do not carry any extra weight or power. The big reward for being trusted is that you get to see the bottom-of-the-barrel dreck. But basically, someone has to do this, and you have shown the rest of the %%sitename%% readers that you have the responsibility and perception to be trusted with this task. Hopefully there are enough of you that no one person will have to expend any unreasonable efforts.

Thank you for contributing to %%sitename%%, and for taking on the mantle of responsibility for keeping the site as high-quality as you've helped make it. I, and all the other readers, salute you.

This site uses a system called "Mojo" to try to keep the comments as high-signal as possible. All users can rate all comments, except their own, between %%rating_min%% and %%rating_max%%. When your comments are rated by others, those ratings are combined into a weighted average -- newer comments count more than older ones -- called your "Mojo". This, roughly, represents the rating we could expect your next comment to receive based on your past comments.

Users who have a mojo greater than a certain minimum and who have posted a sufficient number of comments are considered "trusted" users, and have the added capability to rate comments below the normal minimum rating. If enough of a user's comments are rated below %%rating_min%%, that user becomes "untrusted", which means that respected members of the community have repeatedly indicated that your input is offensive, content-free, or merely intended to annoy others.

If you are untrusted, then your comments are posted with an initial rating equal to your mojo. Since this is below the normal rating minimum, these comments are not visible to any but trusted users. They may, if they choose, rate your comments above the minimum, and make them visible to others. You may earn back the trust of the community simply by posting worthwhile comments, and not spamming.

Please do not see this as a condemnation of you as a person. We're sure you're very nice once we get to know you. This merely means that perhaps you've posted some rather ill-considered comments, and the community as a whole has decided that we'd rather have your input peer-reviewed before it goes out to the general public. Next time you post, think carefully about what you're saying and whether it adds to the topic at hand. If not, there are plenty of places on the web that don't filter input at all, and would be glad to hear whatever's on your mind.

If you believe your posting history does not warrant an untrusted rating and you have been the victim of malicious rating, then please contact us at %%local_email%%. Think carefully, and review your previous comments before you do this. If you complain and have in fact been spamming, then I will not be pleased with you. If your untrusted rating is unjustified though, then we will deal with the situation.

Thank you for reading %%sitename%%.

Hi. How are you?

Although I suspect that I'll drop by to post something (assuming I'm welcome) at certain zeniths or nadirs during the upcoming season, I'm writing this post right now to let you all know that I have decided to resign my proprietor and administrative positions with The Crawfish Boxes as of Friday.

* * * * *

Now, the repressed minimalist within me is once again tugging at my coat sleeve, suggesting that, having come to the point relatively quickly for a change, maybe I should leave things at the 55 words above and hit the road.

I almost did. But I've never been one to use 50 words when 500 would do almost as well, and such is the case here.

First I must say this: I enjoyed my time at The Crawfish Boxes. I most especially enjoyed the camaraderie in the game threads. I enjoyed sharing some of the great moments in team history with people just as enthused about them as me.

Do you remember where you were when Jason Lane caught the flyball that took the Astros to the Series? Or where you were when Luke Scott hit for the cycle? Or when Jeff Bagwell's last ever RBI won a game vs, the Brewers? Or when Biggio had FIVE hits in the game during which he notched his 3000th hit? Or when Woody Williams led the 'Stros to their 30th all-time 1 - 0 road shutout, and only the eleventh time in team history when a) they were held to one run, b) were held to less than five hits, and c) were held to no extra base hits?

OK, I don't expect you to know that last one. And I ain't too sure myself. But on those others, believe me, I know where I was. I was blogging with friends at The Crawfish Boxes. Quite apart from everything about Scoop and Excel and writing itself that I learned while blogging here for the last three years, and quite apart from some of the things, that, well, weren't so much fun, it's those kind of moments that I'll remember most when I consider my time at TCB.

Seriously.

But let me also be frank. When, a couple weeks ago, I first told Tyler Bleszinksi, SBNations' president, and the man who recruited me into the network, about my decision, I wrote that ". . . blogging daily during the season takes a vast amount of energy, and as I consider the upcoming 2008 season, I just can't find it."

Larry Borowsky over at Viva El Birdos suggested that the problem might be burnout, and I won't argue with that. When Tyler brought me on board, he told me it would be a lot of hard work, and if anything, he understated matters. While I still think that introducing features unseen elsewhere like the Game Hero, and the minor league standings, and the crazy graphs and charts I kept was essential in my effort to differentiate TCB on the web from a host of other alternatives you as readers have, in the end such efforts were not sustainable for me over the long haul. Even after I invited StrosBro to co-blog, I still found myself beginning to resent the demands on my time that the site was making.

And that ain't no way to be.

But while I had given some thought to maybe leaving this offseason, and had even mentioned to StrosBro that I might be moving in that direction, it was, to be very honest, The Mitchell Report and its fallout that cinched the decision for me. I've gone on at tiresome length elsewhere, so I'll keep it brief here, but let me that I find the team slogans that talked of "Good Guys" over the past few years rendered just a little laughable, knowing what we now know. And the cynicism with which the Tejada deal was made has literally devastated me, because now I know ownership was complicit, too.

I wrote long posts here and elsewhere defending these people from cynics, and I'll be honest: I feel like a naive fool, I feel like digging my head in the sand where no-one will see me.

I've loved baseball and most especialy the Houston Astros for 21 years, and I'm sure I'll figure out how to keep loving it. If I step back some and just do some thinking for a time, switch off the ESPN, get away for a bit, I'm sure I'll come to some measure of clarity of thought. But right now I feel bitter.

And that ain't no way to be.

More to the point, though, I feel disconnected from the mainstream view on this whole steroid thing. It's been made clear to me that the people who come here want to read about baseball and the Houston Astros; they don't anymore want to simply shake their fists at the sky in anger: They wanna talk 2008 Astros baseball.

But even though I know I should do so, I can't let things go.

And that ain't no way to be.

Not when the site had attracted an audience distinguished by both its intelligence and its graciousness. During my time with the site (which included, and always will include as I look back in future years, the first World Series appearance in Astros history), I was over and over again struck by the idea that the readers here knew much more about the Astros than I did. To my credit, I think, I spoke of that a few times, and emphasized I was just a schmuck with an opinion. Thanks for reading my site anyway.

And thanks to site stalwarts littlevisigoth and saylinara and StrosDux (wherever she is) who helped prop the site up when it just wasn't all that well known. As I leave, and hand proprietorship of the site over to StrosBro, the site is in pretty good shape. It ain't no Bleed Cubbie Blue, and never will be, but it has found a solid niche. That niche would not exist without the support of those early readers. So double thanks to them.

One good thing about all this is that StrosBro is both eager and enthusiastic about continuing. As I said to Larry, "[h]is intelligence and enthusiasm and low bullshit-tolerance will serve him well." Unlike myself, StrosBro has kept up with the news on the upcoming SBNation 2.0, and I know he looks forward to bringing you a new season with new players on a new platform. And I am sure he will continue to do what you've seen him do so well over the last year: tell you what he thinks about the state of the team, in plain English.

StrosBro had asked me what I was gonna do with all my free time, and I guess I can speak of that for a sentence or two in my one last burst of self-indugence. First thing is that Melanie's now got seniority enough at her job where she's now got Sundays off. We actually saw two musicals over the past two weekends; but in short, I want to spend more time with her. I've also got the Astroland website that I for the most part neglected while I was prattling on over here. My goal is to list every damned baseball card I've got on the site, and do it before I'm 50 years old, when I'm gonna sell the whole kit and kaboodle, and hopefully bring in enough from some collector even more lunatic than myself to take a nice trip to someplace far away with Melanie.

And--breaking my revelry, back in the here and now where trips to a distant land are still a dream--a friend of mine who, to use Roger Clemens' phrasing, "doesn't give a rat's ass" about baseball has been bugging me for the last couple years to start a music blog. I told him maybe when I was done with Crawfish, and now I might just do it: write 3 or 4 paragraphs about this or that freaky and obscure song once a week or so. It won't be big time, not like The Crawfish Boxes, but it could be fun. If I do get started, I'll be sure to come over and beg Stros Bro for a link.

* * * * *

Thanks again to all who ever read or commented. It was not only a pleasure; it was illuminating.

Another Roger Clemens post, I apologize. He deserves some coverage here, but the way its been going, the ongoing story of the Rocket, and his effort to convince us that the Mitchell Report has accused him wrongly, is the only thing I'm writing about.

I should be writing about the 2008 Astros, but every time I consider this team, how it includes Miguel Tejada, but not Chad Qualls, not Luke Scott, not Adam Everett, I develop a case of terminal apathy. I think about how our new shortstop has shown no interest in clearing his name, and then I think about the player who has.

I want to believe Clemens, I'll admit it. Separate and apart from the facts, such as they are, I'll admit it. I want it as bad as anything. I spent 20 years believing within reason that if most baseball players were not necessarily trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, and reverent, that at least they were clean.

Silly me. But between now and the time that the first Biggio accusations are published, it titillates my sense of righteousness to watch Clemens as he protests, and I get carried along.

When Clemens spits through clenched teeth that this isn't about records and heroes and numbers, this is about his health, I'm like, you go, Roger! There are times when I listen to the man that I am absolutely sure he's telling the truth.

And, though I generally lean in his direction, there are other times when I'm not so sure.

Anyway, here's some more info about a ballplayer who didn't play for the 'Stros last year, and won't be playing for 'em this year, either.

Sorry 'bout that.

* * * * *

In the Mitchell Report, after noting that Brian McNamee claims to have injected Clemens for the first time sometime after June 10, 1998, it is written that ". . . according to McNamee, from the time that McNamee injected Clemens with Winstrol through the end of the 1998 season, Clemens’ performance showed remarkable improvement."

In a case full of shadowy motivations, and unconfirmable accusations, in that short sentence we have a rare example of a statement that can be checked for truth.

McNamee tells the Mitchell investigators he shot Clemens full of Winstrol, sounds like in late June of 1998, then he says that Clemens' performance got a lot better.

They're still arguing about the first part, but what about the second part? Did Clemens' performance get better in the second half of 1998?

Well, yeah.

Roger Clemens, First Half/Second Half Splits, 1998

Split	G	IP	W	L	K/9	BB/9	HR/9	WHIP
April - June	17	111-2/3	9	6	9.11	4.19	0.56	1.28
July - August	16	123-0/3	11	0	11.56	2.63	0.29	0.93

Shit, that IS remarkable improvement.

Though it may only mean McNamee did his research, the numbers suggest that something happened in late June/early July of 1998 to kick the Rocket into gear.

A B-12 injection, and some xylocaine? Or Winstrol and Deca-Durabolin?

Here's ERA and WHIP, for the same season, broken down by individual months.

Roger Clemens, WHIP and ERA by Months, 1998

Month	ERA	WHIP
April	3.62	1.24
May	3.43	1.26
June	4.04	1.32
July	1.73	1.05
August	0.90	0.70
September	2.70	1.12

Notice that the ERAs and the WHIPs Clemens put up in the three second-half month were each better than his best mark of the first half. Or, in the Microsoft Excel Logic I had to use to find these results, his worst score in the second half, in both categories, was better than his best score of the first half.

1998 is the only year of Roger Clemens' career for which those things can be said. Clemens simply never had another year in which he showed so much second-half improvement.

This fact may be innocuous; McNamee may have merely picked up on it in trying to make the most verisimilitudinous accusation.

On the other hand, it may be very damning.

McNamee implied to the Mitchell investigators that ". . . Clemens used performance enhancing substances during the second half of the season so that he would not tire," and McNamee claimed to the Mitchell investigators that he injected Clemens in 1998, 1999, and 2001.

In reviewing Clemens career, only once, as has been seen, did he post monthly ERA AND monthly WHIPs in the second half that each one surpassed the bests he'd posted in the first half. That year was 1998.

However, Clemens did show the same kind of improvement in his ERAs only in the second halves of both 1990 and 1996, seasons during which Clemens and McNamee were not acquainted.

Roger Clemens, WHIP and ERA by Months, 1990 Month ERA WHIP April 3.09 1.00 May 2.54 0.98 June 2.38 1.32 July 1.00 1.04 August 1.09 0.97 September 1.59 1.50

Roger Clemens, WHIP and ERA by Months, 1996 Month ERA WHIP April 4.17 1.55 May 4.23 1.16 June 4.14 1.49 July 3.98 1.40 August 1.85 1.23 September 3.43 1.19

Although his second-half WHIPs didn't um, whip, those he posted in the first halves of these years, Clemens showed a good deal of improvement in the second half of these two seasons, as well. It may even lead you to believe that if you pitch long enough, even at a high level, you'll run into some slumps, and some streaks, too, and that sometimes they'll butt up against each other.

I'll spare you the numbers, but I also took a look at years in which all but one of Clemens' second-half months were better than his first half-months. The following table summarizes what I found.

Years in Which All Second-Half Months
--But One--
Showed Improvement over the Best First Half Mark

Stat	Years
ERA	1987, 2000
WHIP	1987, 2000, 2002, 2004

The effect is not as drastic for these years as it was for 1990, 1996, and 1998, but it's fair to say, Clemens was better in the second half of these years than he was in the first half. Was this due to drugs as well?

McNamee says he injected Clemens in 2000, although we're left to our own devices in trying to figure out what the deal is with 1987, 2002, and 2004, when he of course pitched for Houston.

* * * * * I think that, after all, this big mess I just made on your computer screen is something like the Mcnamee-Clemens phone call: you're free to take a stab at what it might mean, but in the end, the final leap has to be one of supposition, or even of faith. I've given some evidence that suggests Roger Clemens cheated during some of the years in question in The Mitchell Report. I also give some evidence which could suggest, using the same logic, that he cheated in years in which we know for a fact that Brian McNamee injected Clemens with nothing at all.

I'll admit it may not be that meaningful, but I'm glad that I at least shared my data. . . .

to an audio clip of the reputed McNamee-Clemens conversation.

The Chronicle link is not working.

I listen to the ESPN radio station out of Palm Beach, 70 or 80 miles north of where I work and commute, and lots of times late in the days, their broadcasts are seriously compromised by static.  

Today as I drove home, I could tell  the station was playing a recording of a telephone conversation, and gradually, in between the electronic fuzz, it became clear that they had somehow gotten a copy of the phone call between Clemens and his ex-trainer that people had been talking about this morning.

I heard this and that, including the voice that's supposed to be McNamee saying "What do you want me to do?"  more than a couple times.

But I missed a lot.

When I got home I found out that it was actually Clemens who provided the media with the tape, before his press conference, but I've been unable to find anyone who's actually posted the audio on their site (although the Chronicle appears to do so, without actually coming up with the goods).

Thanks.

[Update]
Link to the phone call from 790thesportsanimal.com.

[Reply to Update] StrosBro is the man, in case I haven't said.

I'm pretty sure Roger Clemens took steroids.  If someone like George Mitchell says he did, that's gonna carry a lot of weight with me.

But seeing Clemens go on in high escutcheon and in withering self-righteousness over the last week or so, I have to say I'm a little less sure than I was the day the Report came out.

If Clemens were playing a game of Texas Hold 'em, you'd say he's gone all in.  Which in its own way is worthy of at least some respect. It's easy to say that Clemens is bluffing, but now, you have to recognize he's gone and bet it all on a single hand.

People would have forgiven the Rocket if he'd meekly given some kind of bullshit apology like Pettitte went and did.  For the good of the team, whatever the fuck.  But if Clemens is subsequently found to be lying now, even as he makes his angry point-by-point denials, even as he does the interview with Mike Wallace, even as he hires Rusty Hardin, well, people will never ever forgive him.

He'll go down in baseball history as a villain worse than Bonds.

The New York Times today has an excellent profile of Hardin, and I gotta say after reading it, I'm even more interested in how all this turns out than I was before.

If you hadn't seen it, Drayton McLane has released his comment on the Mitchell report through the Astros website.

It's short, and it's hardly original, so I hope the Astros and Mr. McLane don't mind my reproducing it in its entirety here:

Now that the Mitchell Report has been released, the Houston Astros are currently reviewing its contents. The Astros support the process that has taken place to compile this report, as well as the recommendations offered by Senator George Mitchell.

As we move forward, we will continue to strongly support the testing program agreed upon by the Commissioner's Office and the Players Association. We feel this program is an effective step in eradicating the use of performance-enhancing substances, and we continue to support this endeavor 100 percent. We also wish to thank Senator Mitchell for his efforts.

I comprehend that a 311-page document is not digested immediately, so the idea that the Astros must review its contents is certainly understandable.

But as an Astros fan, as I myself do the reviewing of today's news, I have several concerns that the Astros' press release leave unaddressed.

The first thing I worry about is how my favorite team, the franchise to which I devote my heart and my time and my dollars, has all of a sudden acquired a reputation as a haven for steroids users.

How did this happen? You don't choose the team you follow--it's much more involved than that--but if I had chosen franchises to follow, I would have chosen the Houston Astros because of their belief--at the VERY least during the McLane regime--that character is an important component in a ballplayer.

While I make no claims at moral perfection myself, I don't think it is unreasonable for me to say that this belief in the importance of character is fundamental to my fandom.

Yet, strangely, now the team that has asked its fans to "root for the good guys" for the past two years can count in its ranks and in its alumni a bevy of players who at the very least are seriously implicated in a sport-wide movement to cheat the game, and its fans.

Roger Clemens is entitled to scream his innocence, but for right now it appears that the club's last Cy Young winner--and the absolute key to the Astros' only NL pennant--has been guilty of cheating. And as things stand right now, that same Cy Young winner will be representing the Houston Astros to young players for the next ten years. Do I as a fan want that? Do the Astros as a team want that? This is a complicated issue, but I believe Mr. McLane as CEO should weigh in on this matter.

Andy Pettitte doesn't have a personal services contract with the team, nor does it appear he wants anything to do with the Astros at all. But he has left a legacy with the team, most notably as the team's 2005 Pitcher of the Year. And now, of course, as a steroids user, as well. My question for McLane with Pettitte might be, what could the Astros have done to have screened our applicants, so to speak, a little better? I'd not suggest that the Astros knew Pettitte was cheating, or had cheated, when they signed him, but I would ask, what might we have done to ascertain that fact a little better? Wasn't there anything the club could have done to realize that they were hiring a cheater?

And now our new shortstop wrote checks for thousands of dollars worth of HGH. Great.

Five prospects, good young men, good young players, gone, in exchange for a cheat. With Tejada, what I want to know, Mr, McLane, quite bluntly, is can this trade be annulled? Given the fact we now know within reasonable doubt that our new shortstop is a cheat and a criminal, can't we send him back whence he came?

I honestly can't figure out how I'd get all that excited watching a known HGH user clean up for the Astros in 160 games next year.

Given my past support of the club, through stadium changes, ownership changes, through managerial changes, through losing seasons, and through bad trades, I'll probably figure something out, but right now, I wanna go watch a movie or something, I want to read a book, anything but think about baseball.

I don't even wanna look at any of my 22,000 Astro baseball cards, and those who know me, know that's saying quite a bit.

I can only hope that attittude changes before April, and if any other fans share my feelings, the club had better hope so, too.

Some fans have expressed relief or even joy that two of the Astros' icons, Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio, were not named in the Mitchell report. And given the nature of rumor, and that these days, we are all certain to hear even the most vicious of them, we should be happy that these false tales about great players and good men were not proven true. But overall, today's news was bad, very bad, for the franchise.

When outside parties look in, they see that the Astros have employed as many high-profile steroids cheats as any team in baseball, from "pioneers" like the now-deceased Ken Caminiti to players as new as yesterday. And if Chris Donnels and Stephen Randolph aren't household names, they still are able to reinforce the idea among those who know no better that Houston has not only tolerated cheating, they have long done so. It's a poor reputation to acquire, and one that distresses me as a fan when I spend any time at all thinking about it.

It threatens my fandom.

Mr. McLane, we all "strongly support the testing program agreed upon by the Commissioner's Office and the Players Association."

But what can you tell us about this franchise we all love so much? Why were these cheaters here? Why are they still here? When will they leave?

I don't claim to represent all fans, but I'd guess at least half your fans want to know.

Link to Mitchell Report
-page 175 starts the list of players

Click here for a list of players named in the report.

I have heard that ESPN Radio on their Mike and Mike Show is reporting that a trainer for the Yankees has admitted to the Mitchell investigators that he supplied Roger Clemens with steroids.

Source

A former New York Yankee strength trainer says information he supplied to the George Mitchell investigation regarding supplying Roger Clemens with steroids is included in the Mitchell report scheduled to be released later today, a source close to the trainer told ESPN The Magazine's Shaun Assael.

Brian McNamee, who worked for the Yankees and as a personal trainer for Clemens and Yankee teammates Andy Pettitte, also told investigators that on at least one occasion, Clemens was in possession of steroids from another supplier, the source said.

More revelations will certainly ensue. The report is to be released today at 2:00PM EST.

UPDATE : ESPN is now reporting that Pettitte as well is on the list.

List of suspended Players

As some of you perhaps know, one of my all-time favorite things is Ray Kerby's Astros Statistical Software.

If you want to know, for example, which pitcher in team history hit .250 or above in a season where he struck out 150, this program is where you find out.

Unfortunately, Mr. Kirby is no longer updating his software, so it's left to me (I guess) to host the files and do the  yearly updates.  I don't mind the work 'cause it's totally worth it.

The reason why I say all this is because the 2007 upate is now done and uploaded.

So if you have the program already, download the data file here, or if you need the program,too, you can get that  here.

Anytime, all year 'round, you can find these files under the 'Resources' tab on the front page.

Before 2007, the last inside the park home run hit by an Astro was by Adam Everett, back in August of 2003.  

I don't think we hit one in 2007, but I'm not positively sure.  Can anyone point me in the direction of one in '07, or state categorically we didn't hit one?

Any help would be appreciated, and will make the next version of Ray Kerby's Statistical Software even better than it already is . . .

tks
rastro'

If I had a hundred bucks to bet (and Lord knows I don't, as property taxes are due at the end of the month), I'd bet that on March 31, when the Astros open the season in San Diego, the lineup that Cooper runs out there will be as follows:

Bourn
Matsui
Berkman
Lee
Pence
Wigginton
Everett
Towles
Pitcher

Barring injury, of course, and maybe realizing that there might be some grey area between Everett 7 Towles 8 and Towles 7 Everett 8.

But beyond that, you can write it down.

I'm not saying necessarily this would be the best lineup, but it's the one Conventional Baseball Wisdom would put out there, the one that someone who begins his sentences with "in all my years in the game" would hand to the umpire at home plate.

It's kind of sad to realize this, because totally apart from some of the lesser offensive talent that populates the lineup, it's a kind of stupid ordering.

Like, why put Michael Bourn at the top? I mean, I guess he's fast, but don't you want to put the guy with the best chance of getting onbase at the top? Dan Szymborski at Baseball Think Factory, in his ZIPS projections, suggests that Bourn is going to have a .314 OBP in 2008. Yet despite this alarming low rate, dollars to doughnuts, he's gonna be leading off on March 31.

Shouldn't you lead off with the guy who's best at getting on? Shouldn't you lead off with Lance?

Never happen of course, but there's a certain mathematically-based methodology that suggests that's exactly what the Astros should do.

I won't get into the whole background here, because I did back in March of '06, but suffice it to say that Cyril Morong and Ken Arneson were involved in the production of a program that suggests most attempts at lineup optimization fall way short.

I took Szymborski's ZIPS projections for 2008 and ran the program, and listed here are its ten best lineups in terms of run production. The number at the left is runs/162 games.

712.49 Berkman Lee Matsui Pence Wigginton Everett Towles Pitcher Bourn
712.18 Berkman Lee Towles Pence Wigginton Everett Matsui Pitcher Bourn
712.03 Berkman Pence Matsui Lee Wigginton Everett Towles Pitcher Bourn
711.92 Berkman Lee Matsui Pence Wigginton Towles Everett Pitcher Bourn
711.80 Berkman Wigginton Matsui Pence Lee Everett Towles Pitcher Bourn
711.72 Berkman Pence Towles Lee Wigginton Everett Matsui Pitcher Bourn
711.50 Berkman Wigginton Towles Pence Lee Everett Matsui Pitcher Bourn
711.49 Berkman Lee Towles Pence Wigginton Matsui Everett Pitcher Bourn
711.46 Berkman Pence Matsui Lee Wigginton Towles Everett Pitcher Bourn
711.32 Berkman Lee Bourn Pence Wigginton Everett Towles Pitcher Matsui

Morong's math may be right, but that doesn't mean Cooper's gonna bat Oswalt in front of Bourn. So here are the top ten lineups with the pitcher batting ninth

681.52 Berkman Lee Bourn Pence Wigginton Towles Matsui Everett Pitcher
681.40 Berkman Lee Bourn Pence Wigginton Matsui Towles Everett Pitcher
681.06 Berkman Pence Bourn Lee Wigginton Towles Matsui Everett Pitcher
680.93 Berkman Pence Bourn Lee Wigginton Matsui Towles Everett Pitcher
680.91 Berkman Lee Bourn Pence Towles Wigginton Matsui Everett Pitcher
680.88 Berkman Lee Bourn Pence Wigginton Everett Towles Matsui Pitcher
680.84 Berkman Wigginton Bourn Pence Lee Towles Matsui Everett Pitcher
680.71 Berkman Wigginton Bourn Pence Lee Matsui Towles Everett Pitcher
680.44 Berkman Pence Bourn Lee Towles Wigginton Matsui Everett Pitcher
680.42 Berkman Lee Matsui Pence Wigginton Towles Bourn Everett Pitcher

If Morong's to be believed, it's only 31 runs given up to the cause of baseball convention. The program ranks the top pitcher nine lineup at 25,530th overall.

And it ranks the top lineup with the pitcher ninth, Berkman third and Lee fourth at number 56,486.

Says it would score 670 runs, or 42 less than number one. A small price to pay for doing things the way they're supposed to be done, right?

And lastly, it says that the lineup at the top, the one I think is most likely to be used on Opening Day, and I bet you agree with me, it says that lineup would score 659 runs.

That's 53 runs less than first-rated lineup would supposedly score. 53 runs! That's 5 wins!

That could win you a division!

To be honest, I'm not sure whether to believe these results or not. I see some of the logic, but I'm a little rusty on my Markov chains, and I have no way then to check the math.

But in thinking about this, I'm a little saddened to realize that we'll never know, one way or the other, because baseball is not forward thinking enough to try some of the more radical-sounding ideas out to see whether or not they'd work.

Instead, we'll see a fast guy who can't get on bat number one and our best onbase guy stuck four spots lower, the way it's always been done.

Yikes. Looks like this Matsui thing is going to happen.

My immediate reaction when I heard about it (and I heard about it later than most) was disdain.

Grand slam in the playoffs notwithstanding, Kaz Matsui just doesn't seem like a dynamic high OPS player, even by the lowered standards at second. He hit four home runs in '07, and 24 doubles. Chris Burke hit 6 homers and 19 doubles in fewer at bats in '07. For that, and I've said it before, give the job to the eternally abused, yet undeniably cheap, Chris Burke.

But now that the deal is well-nigh down, I'm trying to find some silver lining here, and I'm finding it in the words of those who point to Matsui's .249 road average, and his .333 road slugging. This is sort of back to the Matt Holliday/David Wright MVP thing again: Coors Field remains a good hitter's park, but no better than, say, Fenway. If a hitter does well at Coors, there's no reason a priori to toss those numbers out the window.

And besides, as I found out while running through some of MLB.com's rather excellent double situational splits, Matsui had more than a few situations in 2007 where he actually kicked some ass away from Coors.

Matsui's Away Splits in 2007

2x Split		G	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
Overall		55	.249	.304	.333	.637
Pre All-Star		25	.280	.321	.400	.721
	March/ April	7	.370	.393	.519	.926
	June	12	.288	.351	.404	.755
August		13	.346	.414	.442	.856
Leading Off		41	.357	.419	.446	.865
No Outs		47	.365	.385	.308	.693
Close/Late		16	.381	.381	.571	.952

The truth of the matter may be simply that our much-maligned Kazuo is, rather than a road-hog, just streaky, and prone to horrific slumps. He hit .219 overall in May, and the road component was .094. And while .219 over any significant stretch is gonna drag things down, .094 will do so stronger, faster, harder.

I don't know if this is going to make anybody feel any better, but at least with a slump, you can do what Colorado did: sit him. As we saw with Bidge last year, it's hard to implement a home and road platoon.

And while I'm sure that Matsui was every bit as bad with New York as their boorish fans suggest, I also have no problem with the idea that somebody might really turn their career around once they leave the Big Apple. Happens all the time, right?

So cheer up, everybody! It might not be that bad!

I was cataloguing some minor league cards before I put them away when I realized what a large bust Ralph Henriquez has actually been.

From there, it wasn't long before my curiosity took over and I made this:

Where We Stand With The '05 Draft

Round	Player	Position	AVG/OBP/SLG/OPS, ERA/WHIP/K9 in 2007	Comments
1	Brian Bogusevic	P	4.61 1.55 7.01,   mostly at High A Salem,   some at AA Corpus	Lefties take longer?
1 (S'wich)	Eli Iorg	OF	.296 .350 .512 .863   at High A Salem	Ended year in June with elbow injury
2	Ralph Henriquez	C	.185 .227 .280 .507   at A Lexington	Worst second-round pick this century
3	Thomas Manzella	SS	.264 .324 .339 .663   split between High A Salem   & AA Corpus	Baseball America says Manzella is our best defensive infielder
3 (S'wich)	Joshua Lindblom	P	------	Never Signed; went to U Tennessee
4	Josh Flores	OF	.279.345 .422 .767   split between High A Salem   & AA Corpus	Kicked ass at Salem; not so good at Corpus
5	Billy Hart	3B	.385 .451 .305 .836   at High A Salem	Won Carolina League Batting Crown
6	Brandon Barnes	OF	.251 .336 .459 .795   at Short A Tri-City
7	Timothy Johnson	SS	.186 .273 .248 .521   at Rookie Greeneville	Has played three years of Rookie ball--you NEVER see that. Not particularly good defensively either
8	Koby Clemens	3B	.252 .344 .412 .755   at A Lexington	That switch to catcher previously dismissed still might make it work for him
9	Jordan Meaker	P	------	Never Signed; went to Dallas Baptist
10	Allen Langdon	OF	------	Released in June '07. Injuries took a toll as he never progressed past Rookie Greeneville
11	Cory Lapinski	P	------	Released in March '07, having reached Short A Tri-City
12	Tip Fairchild	P	10.29 .214 .514   at AA Corpus	Made only two starts for Corpus before blowing out his elbow
13	Eric King	SS	.229.308 .291 .599   at High A Salem
14	Mark Ori	1B	.272.350 .395 .746   at High A Salem
15	Eric Sheridan	P	------	Released in June '06; pitched Single A ball in '07 with the A's